Falcoms

I finally got my 6-port n/a 13b tuned and dyno'd, and I have to admit, I'm quite disappointed because of the potential my motor has, but very happy with the results in regards to how the engine is equipped. Though slightly confusing, understand that I am running the stock VDI intake manifold as I haven't scraped together the funds for my weber IDA throttle body injection and intake setup, along with a racing beat streetable header and presilencer, along with an apexi GT cat-back exhaust.

All in all, the fact that I missed my goal of making the stock bhp at the wheels (160hp), I was within my tolerences. Sadly, due to the stock intake and off the shelf exhaust, I only netted roughly an optimistic 30 hp increase out of the engine.



You can really see where the intake manifolds restriction chokes up the engine at about 4500 rpm, due to the way the hp curve slows its climb, and the torque curve falls off quite a bit.

RX200013B

was the bridge over both aux and sec., or just secondary's?
also what injectors are you running

Falcoms

full bridge on the aux ports, a little more than half on the secondary's, no bridge on the primary's. Also, the template I started with was pineapple racing's large street port 6-port. I started by porting the housings to the template, then used some lexan to make the layout for the bridges based on when I wanted the ports to start opening.

RX200013B

are you still using the sleeves, or did you remove them?

rotarygod

iTrader: (1)

Your results are no different than anyone else doing bridgeports with stock intake manifolds. That's precisely why bridging those motors sucks but nobody ever listens and everyone fails at it. You can eclipse those numbers with STOCK ports! Get an ecu and intake manifold on there asap to see some more potential. I still doubt you'll top 200 rwhp though which is possible with a nice streetport.

Falcoms

Nope, aux sleeves are completely removed, VDI is wired open, and there is not a single emissions component on the vehicle. Even with doing all this, the car has some serious bottom end grunt compared to the stock motor.

Rotarygod: Yes, I understand that, and I built the motor as a half bridge because I blew a coolant seal and I already had the e11v2 installed, so I could easily run it. I built it with the stock intake manifold because I didn't have the funds to build a sheet metal intake or run the weber throttle bodies that I wanted to. I'm hoping by the end of the year to have this installed and hope to check back with better results. I was not suprised by the results because of the stock intake being about twice the length that the bridgeported motor should have based on my port timing. The real challenge comes in when I get the weber throttle body installed and I build an air box for ram air off the turbo hood scoop on my car. I'm planning on running the engine as it is with TPS for load but with MAP sensor correction, and hopefully it yields a successful result.

Skidtron

iTrader: (1)

Could you post the before dyno sheet if you have it? What size wheels and tires do you have on that car? final drive?

rotarygod

iTrader: (1)

Well at least you've got a Haltech. I was really going to have to flog you if you still had a stock ecu!

Why didn't you just streetport it? I still stand by my opinion that 6 port housings are crap to bridge and so far every single attempt anyone has ever made has proven this correct. What's wrong with a good old streetport? Those housings just don't have the flow characteristics for a bridge.

After you get the intake on there, you'll probably have a decent driving car. Your torque doesn't look bad when comparing it to stock but I'm wondering what will happen to that low end with the Weber manifold on there? I suspect low end power will go down but it should if you are trying to get that engine into it's sweet spot. Of course you're going to need a higher redline.

Falcoms

Well, I had a moderate street port on it from when I built the engine the first time, but when it came time to tear it down due to the bad coolant seal, I just had an itch for more power. I figured that since I only had s5 6-port engines to work with, I'd just give it a shot. Sure, I could probably have more power if I went with making a monster 4-port by connecting the 2ndary and aux ports, but my budget constraints didn't allow me to get my rotating assembly balanced for the rpm necessary for it.

t-von

iTrader: (8)

What is your definition of bottom end? 0-3k = low end....3k-6k = mid range....6k-9k = top end or at least that's how I see it. 3k and below your engine isn't making any torque what so ever based on your graph. With your aux open that low in the rpm range, too much of your intake charge is reversing through the always open aux ports down low. Remember the aux ports have a late closing. So late that the engine is starting on it's compression stroke b4 the rotor passes over the aux port to close it. During compression in the low range, that air will reverse back up the open aux port therefore reducing the amount that can be compressed and ignited. The less you compress and ignite, the less force against the e-shaft. All this means is less torque down low.

rotarygod

iTrader: (1)

I definitely would not have hogged out the end ports into 1 giant port! Not on a street driven engine. It has massive flow potential but it also needs a correspondingly high redline. You'd have poor low end and probably some pretty low midrange power as well. Unless it's in a race car with a close ratio transmission, there'd be no advantage to it.

Falcoms

t-von: Though aux port reversion is a minor issue, it hasn't affected driving on the street in any detrimental way. Though the chart shows quite low torque in the low end, actually driving the car is actually easier now without the aux port sleeves. That and the fact that it idles at about 1400 rpm doesn't hurt, either. I can drive around town with minimal clutch slip to take off, dog the engine down at 1-2k rpm no sweat, even stick it into 5th gear at 30 mph without the engine so much as chugging or making any sign of displeasure, so reversion is quite low on my list of concerns.

rotarygod: I agree entirely that it would not work on the street well at all, but again, that's why I maintained moderation when porting this engine. Though, I don't care who you are, there's just something about a street car that rev's up to 12,000 rpm that is pretty cool.